Feminist Self-Owned On Male Porn Star Theory

Slate, that bastion of feminist mental gymnastics, has an article about some male porn star who appeals to women because he supposedly embodies nonthreatening boyishness.

In the winter issue of Good Magazine, Amanda Hess has a fascinating profile of James Deen, a young, handsome porn star who is becoming famous for actually appealing to women. Due to his boyish, slightly skate-punk aesthetic, naturally toned body, and ability to connect emotionally (or at least appear to) with his female co-stars, Deen has garnered a following of devoted young women in an industry that in most cases ignores them entirely. Hess explains that Deen’s school-boy charm is what makes him approachable—and sexy—to his female fans:

Deen has carved out a niche in the porn industry by looking like the one guy who doesn’t belong there. Scroll through L.A.’s top porn agency sites and you’ll find hundreds of pouty women ready to drop to their knees, but just a few dozen men available to have sex with them. These guys all have a familiar look—neck chains, frosted tips, unreasonable biceps, tribal tattoos. Deen looks like he was plucked from a particularly intellectual frat house.

Hess goes on to discuss why there aren’t more guys like Deen in the male porn-star stable, and her findings tell us just as much about male viewers’ hang-ups as they do about women’s erotic preferences. Part of the problem is that men (who largely control the porn industry) imagine that women want everything big—“Big arms. Big abs. Big dicks,” as Hess puts it—when what they really want is something a little less overwrought. One of Hess’ subjects described her attraction to Deen thusly: “He was almost like a guy that you would just hang out with at Hebrew school.”

What a robust theory from sex-positive feministland! A hardcore male porn star women love because he’s a caring, emotionally available niceguy. Except it isn’t true.

A number of commenters familiar with the field pointed out the factual problems with Hess’ theory.

You’ve got to be kidding. This guy, while lacking in tribal tattoos, makes up for it in being like every other incredibly raunchy porn star. As a normal heterosexual male, I’ve seen him in tons of porn (as there’s really only like 5 male porn stars, as the article says, and there [sic] in everything), and, past looks, he is in no way some sensual lovemaking hebrew camp dude. He does not stare longingly into their eyes and whispers in their ears. He chokes women, slaps them, does pretty degrading things to them. He fits perfectly into the stereotype of porn as a male-centric, women-as-objects display of power. If women actually watch him, If a women who did not like porn watched one of his, they would in no way find it any different, save the frosted tips, ect. This artice is really silly.

***

Do a google search or xvideos search for “pornstar punishment” with “James Deen” and you can see for yourself how well he “emotionally connects” with the women while he chokes them and slaps them. The article seems kind of funny after seeing that. Poorly researched.

Hilarity. Another crackpot feminist theory bites the dusty muff. It seems the truth is as it always was, particularly of women who love to watch male-oriented porn: chicks dig jerks, especially jerks who choke and slap them during “lovemaking”.

Why do feminists run like rats from a spotlight beam whenever they are confronted with the reality of female sexual nature and women’s preference to surrender to dominant men? What is it about that fact that sends them into paroxysms of nonsensical deconstructivism babble?

Steve Sailer has pithily remarked that the goal of feminist writers is to rearrange the world so that, come the revolution, ugly feminists will be desired by men. I have a corollary to that theory.

Feminists loathe the objectification of women because they know they don’t measure up as objects of desire.

The natural female desire to submit to a powerful man is especially galling to feminists, because it strikes at the heart of their conceit: that women can, and more importantly, *want* to scale the heights of achievement just like men do, and the only thing stopping them is misogyny and the patriarchy. If feminists were forced to acknowledge that most women have no such inclination, that in fact they prefer to support with their love and affection a worthy alpha male, they would have to face the unpleasant truth that they are a minority of masculinized freaks out of touch with the majority of their own sex. Outcasts are always fighting to make the rest of the world seem deluded and tyrannical.

That Slate article has another doozy of a theory about why there aren’t more James Deens in male-centric visual porn.

But the real obstacle to the proliferation of female-friendly male porn stars is, oddly, a rather nasty and subtle strain of homophobia, revealed in the following double-bind:

The straight male performer must be attractive enough to serve as a prop, but not so attractive that he becomes the object of desire.

Hess is spot on. Men need to see a penis in straight porn (presumably to stand in for their own), but not one that is attached to a guy who might be threateningly attractive, not to mention plausibly appealing to the woman involved. Maybe this insistence on a male blank slate (a kind of reverse objectification, when you think about it) makes it easier to project oneself onto the disembodied penis, but it also protects men from the potentially scary experience of being turned on by both partners of a heterosexual encounter—which, yes, does involve another dude. In other words, the bland interchangeability of the “unreasonable” looking men allows them to avoid confronting the terrifying specter of homosexuality.

Yup, homophobia is the reason why there aren’t feminist-approved male role models in porn.

Folks, you can’t make this shit up. Unless you’re a graduate of Columbia University.

Gay fabulosity is most likely biological in origin, so straight men are not going to be turned on by the penises pounding away in porn or the men attached to those penises, no matter how nonthreatening they look. Straight men watch porn because the sight of a hot babe’s body in the throes of sex, and the visual of various female orifices getting penetrated, is arousing. Straight men don’t like to see the faces of the male porn stars because it’s distracting from the action, and BONER KILLING.

The NewYorkBetaTimes, of all organs, even had a story about a study which proved that the sight of penises or men engaged in gay sex has no effect on the penile responses of straight male viewers. But I guess to the gatekeepers of the homophobia grievance flame, such inconvenient truths are mere speed bumps in the road to an ego-ensconcing distortion of reality.

I wonder if people realize that three quarters of mainstream internet websites would disappear overnight if a law mandated that no more than half of their content could be feelgood, made-up shit.

Its pretty interesting to watch those Ultimate Surrender female lesbian wrestling matches where the loser gets fucked with a strap on by the winner. Those women do some raw shit and I must admit, often have some good moves. Bottom line, is they pull hair, slap, screw ass, etc. I’m thinking that;s as good as any other evidence that they love this shit.Its even funny to watch some of these girls look forward to losing. Check it out sometime. Youporn has tons of these clips.

The pseudo-intellectuals are over analyzing this to the extreme. Do you know what I look for in a male pornstar (besides staying out of the shot)? Someone who looks like me. Why? So I can picture myself fornicating with that hot chick.

James Deen, despite starring in hilariously awesome productions like the “Sex and Submission” series, looks like he has less testosterone than I did when I was 8 and simply doesn’t fit the bill.

Someone like Derrick Pierce, on the other hand, looks enough like my physical doppelganger that I thought one of my cousins had gone the XXX route at first. Is it gay to deliberately seek his work out? Nope. Hot chicks in porn are a dime a dozen, male pornstars who aren’t distractingly fat, skinny, hairy, old, or otherwise gross are harder to come by.

I don’t project my hopes or desires on to the “actor”, but there are a few stars I know who will be doing what’s apparently known as “pornstar punishment”. And at least the bitches in the industry love M. Ferrara, who made it mainstream. (Watching his raw series is probably the closest we can come to vicariously living the life of an apex alpha male).

Good for you, but I somehow doubt the average porn connoisseur personally identifies with the roided out meatheads they use as penis props.

Back in late VHS days, a buddy of mine worked in a video store, and the pron regulars tended to be really omega types, real ugly or physical deformities, etc. I suspect those dudes somehow got off on being betafied by seeing unobtainable girls being ‘punished’ by super-exaggerated manly men. Online has so much free stuff for drive-by jerkoffs, but I’d bet the producers know the psychologies of their paying customers.

“I suspect those dudes somehow got off on being betafied by seeing unobtainable girls being ‘punished’ by super-exaggerated manly men” – This poor, self-revealing bit of an attempt at psychology is nearly as bad as the article.

I do agree that James looks a lot less threatening than the likes of Derrick.

But I do think his attitude is rough. He plays very well the role of Dominant in S&S movies. In other words, he got style (his acting is very close to a true BDSM scene).

The feminist if obvisouly wrong (what a surprise…); his virtue is not being un-threatening. The point is, there is a more refined aspect to the fetish, that allows for a more sophisticated appearance – thus he is fitting. Of course that skinhead-looking actors are fitting as well (even though they aproach more the gay leather stereotype).

What you’re really talking about is the SWPL girls’ love affair with nebbish Members of Tribe. Ever wonder why so many shiksas’ blogs feature references to ‘Annie Hall’? You won’t find that on a Jewish girl’s blog.

Back when I watched hardcore porn, I wanted the male stars to be average-looking (or better yet, downright ugly and bestial, that’s one of the reasons interracial porn is so popular these days) because I’m average-looking. If the female star is banging an average-looking guy, it makes her available to me. If she’s banging Brad Pitt, then I’m out of the equation.

Remember Ed Powers? A creepy guy who filmed himself fucking porn actress wannabes. Some of the girls were hot. Others not so hot. But if he could get laid like a champ, he conveyed there was hope for the men who rented his vids.

Not going to google the guy, but I imagine that this is the guy I perceive to be Faye Reagan’s boyfriend, from the amount of scenes they do together. If that’s the guy, the only reason why he’s in prion is because his hotass gf got him in the door. The only reason why a guy would care about the size of an actor’s unit is cause it’s fun to watch deepthroating. Besides, we all know the real female pron is Twilight and for what reason that is the case.

Ironically I think she is right about the emotional connection to a certain extent. I like many dudes don’t like porn where they are banging the second the video starts. There has to be some kind of plot even cheesy.

[Heartiste: My impression is that “many dudes” don’t give a shit about the plot, even a cheesy contrived plot. There’s a reason why free 2 minute porno clips on YouPorn et al are the one stop shops for most guys nowadays.]

I prefer porns where the girls is clothed when the video starts like many dudes.

[“Many dudes” prefer the chick to be naked sooner rather than later. Perhaps you fall on the feminized side of malehood? Not a knock, men do vary in their masculinity. I myself like to see the chick in some sexy lingerie for a few seconds during a porn.]

But she is wrong on guys being threatened by male porn stars. Pretty much every dude complains about closeups on the guys ass or the times when the camera is not focused on the girls face.

[The whole “men are threatened by X” meme, with X being whatever it is that feminists approve of, is a load of horseshit.]

I disagree there has to be “some plot, any plot”. A cheesy plot is as bad as no plot as all as far as I’m concerned. Also, a standard youporn banging scene is often the shortest path to a boner.

But that doesn’t mean a typical sex scene is the epitome of porn. For me, ideal stories wouldn’t waste time getting naked and getting sexual, but there would be actual conflict between the characters. For example, the girl would appear to put up some genuine resistance and contrary desires before submitting. There would also be appeals to fundamental desires, like one man dominating lots of women at the same time.

It’s not as much that there needs to be a plot, as there needs to be the ruse of a seduction…

We like clips where the man gets closer to the girl, undresses her, penetrates her and she seems into it. That first hole violation, followed by spanking, choking, and jack-hammering till the end of December is what makes a clips good.

I skip if I hit play and the dude is already pounding away or if I can tell that she’s faking it.

Having worked security in strip clubs in my early twenties, I had the chance to chat up a few porn starlets who worked the club as feature performers. This article never mentions what I was told was the single most important requirement for a male porn star.

Male performers have to be able to come on que. Porn is a business; so every minute the film is being drawn out beyond what is necessary costs money. How many guys can realistically say they’d be able to be in a room with a dozen other people, do their thing, and come within sixty seconds of being told “its time for the money shot. Finish up.” When producers find a guy that can do that consistently, it trumps all other factors.

Kind of makes me question whether the “inside sources” for the profile are just a figment of this writer’s imagination.

There’s just one conceivable way to make the idea of fucking Amanda Hess less than absolutely revolting.

And that is to dress her up in a ratty cloak and pretend she’s a boy runaway who has become lost and wandered up to my remote Black Forest hut. Imagine my surprise when, catching her emerge from the lake for a bath, I spot a little pink quim!

“I … I was afraid to tell you, Mein Herr,” she would say.

“It is all right, Kindlein. Let’s go back to the hut and sort this out. By the way, you ever had Nutella … ?”

“It seems the truth is as it always was, particularly of women who love to watch male-oriented porn: chicks dig jerks, especially jerks who choke and slap them during “lovemaking”.”

I doubt there is a woman on this planet who truly enjoys male-oriented porn.

[Heartiste: There are women who enjoy visual porn (as opposed to female-centric verbal porn a la Twilight) but you are basically right that most women don’t seek out visual porn for masturbatory purposes. However, as evidenced in that linked NYTimes study, what women seek out and what they vaginally respond to are often two different things. Visual porn of all kinds — MF, FF, MM, ApeApe — causes women to tingle in their special places.]

I dig jerks (and I’d love to have someone who slapped me during “lovemaking”) but I’m still viscerally disgusted by porn …

[Disgust is a strong word and indicative of your loathing of male desire and the male anatomy. My observation is that most women are indifferent to porn.]

I can only give you my personal perspective here, but I am basically indifferent to porn because (I speak of only the couple movies I have seen) they often don’t show the woman getting off, at least not in a realistic way. It seems so incredibly fake that it ruins the whole fantasy and then . . . nothing.

I’ve read the study that mentions a females gina-tingle arousal despite their verbal affirmations to the contrary. It’s almost as if their awareness and conciousness is disconnected from their physiological and psychological responses.

Maya, not that I take your word of physical rough-housing during sex as the truth, but I’m not denying it either. Since feminists state ‘All sex is forced rape’ and it is the male’s duty to escalate to sex, can you explain how a wealthy guy pursues this strategy who a has severe financial repurcussions after the act even though you would enjoy the physical domination of sex with a rich, powerful, and physically attractive man and the financial reward that would accompany this should you choose to take the feminist route allowed by law, without me resorting to displaying my sexual prowess from the the windows of my card-board box? Just curious.

Notice how she described him as “constantly apologizing”. It is no accident that this guy is a darling with the feminist blogger. I was also struck by the description of the girl who had initially wanted to fuck him (when she thought he was a big dick pussy dominator), for whom the attraction waned when she realized he was a pussy with a big dick.

“The NewYorkBetaTimes, of all organs, even had a story about a study which proved that the sight of penises or men engaged in gay sex has no effect on the penile responses of straight male viewers. ”

By contrast, a study done on women testing vaginal arousal found that women are turned on by lesbian porn no matter their stated sexual orientation. It also found that women are turned on by watching monkeys fuck. Now we can all assume it is an evolutionary trait that exists because in our distant past rape was the natural order and girls being turned on by anything makes sex and pair bonding easier, but BITCHES BE FREAKS!

I’ll cop to it and admit this one. I am turned on by some nature documentaries of animals doing it, but not in a desire to actually do it with an animal. More like, “I’d sure like to be doing with a human male what that bird’s doing with the other one.”

As for her assessment of Deen… it’;s complete bullshit. Most of the porn that he “stars” in would be characterized as anal rape by any feminist with even a tiny, tiny, tiny bit of integrity. So in a nutshell, Amanda Hess has secret forced sex fantasies

Very true. Playing up the daddy role creates lust in girls just as much as fucking them like Jack the Ripper.

If anyone needs an interesting perspective on this, read up on Charles Manson. Nuel Emmons claims that Charlie created his deep bond and the idol worship within his girls by taking on a father role, playing it up and even telling his women to picture their father was fucking them as he did.

I think every Latina I’ve ever banged called me “papi”, too. What a delicious thing to hear in the act. And not a few white girls were easily nudged along to calling me “daddy”, or themselves “your little girl”, LOL.

Yes every female has rape fantasies. But there is rape and then there is rape rape ie a chick being fisted while being shat upon. Most girls ain’t down with the latter, but I’m sure that Amanda Hess would be.

My observation is that women are intimidated if a man has any interest in any image of another woman; say for example if you are keen on some female actress or singer. The fact that that person may not even be alive or is now an old lady,and is someone you have never and will never meet seems to matter not at all. Women cannot tell the difference between the pixalated photgraphic image and a real woman. As all women seem to think that they are 10s this jealousy is perhaps understandable (but stupid).

It’s projection. When a girl likes a band, it just means she wants to blow the singer. When a guy likes a band, he actually likes the music.

When a man comments that Angelina or whoever looks hot, it’s just a meaningless passing comment.

When a woman comments about a male celebrity, it means she constantly fantasizes about tossing his salad while being “made love to” by her husband. She fears that men are thinking the same thing about Angelina.

LOL @ a Slate writer basing an argument on an article from Amanda Hess. You only had to sample Amanda’s writing from her Washington City Paper days to realize she’s fucking bonkers. She has a really messed up view of the world.

Also, LOL @ people who can’t find employment while Amanda Hess presumably collects a paycheck. Clearly it’s not that hard to find to get a job…

While the slate journalist may be wrong in this case, I still think there is something to her narrative.

Go to reddit.com/r/ladyboners, the chick version of every guy smut site ever. It’s a place where women talk about the tingles images of guys give them.

It turns out, yes, physical attractiveness of men is not the primary factor in getting women to swoon. Don’t be ugly, of course.

Almost all of the men are famous. The few remainder are models.

This is rarely true for men’s eye candy sites, where the subjects of the photos are rarely known.

I asked why the women seem to feel the most physical attraction for famous men. One of the hamsters said she thought it was because ‘women like feeling an emotional connection to men, and they knew if famous men were funny, smart, mysterious, etc., so it made them more attractive.’

I don’t know if the explanation was accurate, I suspect not, but I thought it was interesting. Either way, it’s a datapoint that the ‘women are attracted to jerks’ is simplistic.

[Heartiste: Fame does not necessarily equal emotional connection. Fame = power, which is predominantly attractive to women. However, the commonplace observation that chicks dig jerks (as most notoriously exemplified by their love of rough sex) does not automatically require that women be indifferent to establishing an emotional connection with a man. Some of the biggest jerks are also highly adept at building connections with women that make those women feel like they’ve known those men forever.]

[Heartiste: Some of the biggest jerks are also highly adept at building connections with women that make those women feel like they’ve known those men forever.]

This reminds me if you watch all of the dateline shows, or Greed/scam/scoundrels, etc. on criminals and sociopaths you realize that they are jerks, but they connect with women. Almost all of the women say that felt like he was a presence when he entered the room, he made her feel “special”, she felt an instant connection with him. They aren’t necessarily aware of it, but sociopaths are the best at connecting with people naturally.

not much of a story here. the guy is cute in a cuddly way, like the cabana boy a north american white woman would meet doing sex tourism in the caribbean. apart from that, yes women do like getting their hair pulled and slapped like a bitch, but they prefer it was done by a cuddly teddy bear.

my favorite part of this post is the link to Fag McFaggot who graduated with a BA from Columbia. Ropes, lamp-posts, etc etc…

“I hate feminism!” he blurts out, but rushes to rephrase. “In its truest form, I’m down with feminism, but the feminist movement has gone from being about equal rights—something I really believe in—to telling me how horrible I am because I have a penis. That shit drives me crazy.”

A snip from his interview at the Good Men Project. I bet he reads your site.

I do however think that a bland porn star, or one whose face is not shown
much, might facilitate the illusion, i.e. the male watcher editing in
himself as the male partner.

Alistair McLean, a novelist writing action-style novels, made a similar
point – the women are described in some detail, whereas the men
are not, precisely so the (usually male) reader can identify with the
male protagonist.

Hmm. I suppose the heterosexual male horror for being turned on by their inner gayness must be a modern phonomenon, which would explain all that ‘Golden Age’ porn with the awful closeups on the males’ faces as they nutted on some chick’s face. They really did like them gays back then.

Folks, apparently this post wasn’t explicit enough in defining the parameters of argument. We need to separate women into two groups: the first, those women (most of womankind) who are actively repulsed or indifferent to visual porn. And the second group: those women who seek out visual porn for stimulation.

It is true that most women need some emotional connection from their men to feel comfortable enough to proceed sexually. That is why a lot of visual porn does nothing for them. This is a different issue than the one encompassed by the observation that when women do get sexual, they prefer the submissive role and their men dominant, even rape-y.

BUT, of those minority of women who are drawn to visual porn, and seek it out, many if not most of them don’t require the emotional connection that less visually oriented women require. These kinds of women, who are probably higher in testosterone, are not looking for boyish, caring male porn stars as the feminists, male and female, in this post’s linked articles assert they are. Their claim is immediately discredited by pointing out that James Deen, supposed archetype of caring lovemaker, is actually a big fan of slapping and choking.

I suspect that Amanda Hess secretly gets off on the rougher aspects of visual porn and is ashamed by her feelings, and as a commenter above wrote, she is rationalizing her love for MOT Deen.

Heartsy, didn’t you post a study a few days ago saying that women ARE turned on by visual porn?

[Heartiste: No, but I know what you’re driving at. That’s why I make a distinction between being turned on by watching porn (which a lot of women experience if we go by their lubrication measurements) and actively *seeking out* visual porn (which most women don’t because it isn’t what primarily arouses them.)]

I don’t think we need to separate us in two groups. It’s just you who has to recognize the difference between normal sex (like in movies) and sex in porn (it’s something like rape and “rape”).

[Women who are into visual porn love the dominance aspect of it. Studies have shown a majority of women entertain rape fantasies on a regular basis. Waving your hands and whining that ain’t so isn’t gonna change that fact.]

If you don’t know what I’m saying, here’s an example of a visual sex scene I like (as a woman): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ejwPs1JK7I while I don’t want to spend a second of my life watching any of the male-oriented porn.

So what’s the difference?

[Heartiste: Who cares what you like, you solipsistic queen bee? We’re talking about women in the aggregate.]

“That’s why I make a distinction between being turned on by watching porn (which a lot of women experience if we go by their lubrication measurements) and actively *seeking out* visual porn (which most women don’t because it isn’t what primarily arouses them.]”

I think women in these studies were watching ‘sex scenes’ NOT male-oriented porn.

[Heartiste: “Male-oriented” porn is just shorthand for 99% of produced visual porn. It means porn that isn’t plot-driven or filmed through heavy gauze.]

I doubt any woman would be turned on watching porn for males.

[The study shows that women get lubricated watching various sex acts involving men, women and apes. If you have a problem with this, take it up with your sisters.]

“Studies have shown a majority of women entertain rape fantasies on a regular basis. Waving your hands and whining that ain’t so isn’t gonna change that fact.”

No woman on this planet has a fantasy to be raped like Monica Bellucci in Irreversible. No one fantasizes about this. Waving your hands and whining … etc.

[Except they have. Try again.]

You know what’s your problem?

[Excessive charm?]

You use same words for very different things.

[Balls, nuts. Two of one, pair of the other.]

Fantasizing about passionate lovemaking is not fantasizing about real rape and sex scenes are also something very different from male-oriented porn.

[Yes, MAYATROLL, women really do fantasize about nonconsensual rape. Pretending that the evidence doesn’t exist isn’t going to make it so.]

[Heartiste: “Male-oriented” porn is just shorthand for 99% of produced visual porn. It means porn that isn’t plot-driven or filmed through heavy gauze.]

The main difference between sex in porn and sex in movies is that the former is more explicit? So why, in your opinion, feminists claim that porn is disrespectful towards women? OK, I found your answer …

“Feminists loathe the objectification of women because they know they don’t measure up as objects of desire.”

And hot non-feminist women don’t mind to be objectified because they know they are hot enough for men to drool over them?

less visual women need to be drawn into the fantasy, and this is done more readily with words. thus the popularity of romance novels and erotic lit web sites whose participants are overwhelmingly female.

afaik there isn’t any pov porn shot from the female perspective. it would essentially be the camera lens repeatedly bashing into the headboard finished off with jizz spraying on it anyway. not a whole lot to see.

“afaik there isn’t any pov porn shot from the female perspective. it would essentially be the camera lens repeatedly bashing into the headboard finished off with jizz spraying on it anyway. not a whole lot to see.”

lzzlzlzlzlzllllzlzzz

the only acceptable female pov is girl getting head from another girl being banged from behind.
and both girls had better be 8+ or it’s pure grotesquerie.

“Feminists loathe the objectification of women because they know they don’t measure up as objects of desire.”

Absolutely. If you’ve ever been around a woman when dudes are ogling at a scantily clad chick in a movie or IRL, you’ll notice they are most definitely *not* concerned about the welfare of the woman in question or worried that she’s being “objectified.” Maybe they’ll explain their annoyance using that rationalization, but really it’s pure jealousy.

The most “normal” women I know are the ones who get most turned on by porn of women getting degraded. They’re also the types of decent women that “The Hook” works on as a way to introduce yourself.

Women are: (a) competitive with other women by nature, and (b) prefer to be submissive but rarely find guys who know how to dominate without being BDSM. That’s why even “normal” dames don’t mind a little rough porn here and there — it’s the submission fantasy to the extreme.

I like watching porn, not as much as a man does, but I do. One or two times a week.

It’s all a about sex, obviously… If you want emotional connection, buy a dog, phone a friend… Sex is different. I’ve been married for more than 10 year and I truly love him as much as he loves me, but If I thought about emotional connections in bed, my sex life would probably be dead by now. After ten years I have to think of my husband as a hot guy with a hard-on who’s about to grab my hair and fuck me. Ok, we cuddle afterwards, but come on, that’s what sex is about.

I’ve watched some of this guy videos… I don’t like his boyish looks but it somehow interesting. I’ve watched porn in the 90’s and I also like somo old stuff and for me porn nowadays is more of a pissing contest (unless they stick a baseball bat inside de porn star anus, it’s not hardcore enough) so it gets kind of repetitive. So it’s nice that he’s different. And I like his dominant style (I’d hate if he were gentle and sweet) although I don’t really like actual BDSM like chocking in my sex life – this is also something good about porn, you can “try” things and be turned on by them without actually trying them.

If you could direct a porn movie that would please me and my female friends who also enjoy porn, I’d only choose better-looking men and I’d give more attention to their bodies. All the rest would be pretty much the same.

I despise all that nebulous talk of “fluid sexuality”. It’s just swirly girl language the French feminists invented to dodge logic, going as far, I believe Alan Sokal discovered, as to decry “straight lines” as encoded patriarchal tools of oppression or some such gibberish.

But you know what? They’re not entirely wrong. ALL logicians are men. Logic is MALE. But when they dispensed with logic, there isn’t “another logic” as they endlessly assert, only their private grievance as power-hungry cunts.

Heh. He may be a pussy, but check out his faculty page: every year his undergrads are exclusively female. It’s a total academic harem which he has to keep happy. This ought not to be underestimated as a factor in his “research”.

“Straight men don’t like to see the faces of the male porn stars because it’s distracting from the action, and BONER KILLING.”

Porn is simply being destroyed by this. I swear they must stick the camera guy with a cattle prod whenever he accidentally focuses in too closely on the chick and cuts the stunt cock’s face out of the picture.

Here’s a free moneymaking opportunity – start up an actual straight porn studio where your audience (that’s guys, by the way) isn’t constantly being asked to look at some other guy’s ass or drooling chimp face. You’ll have the field all to yourself. You can thank me later.

“Men are generally more interested in and responsive to visual sexually arousing stimuli than are women. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the amygdala and hypothalamus are more strongly activated in men than in women when viewing identical sexual stimuli. This was true even when women reported greater arousal.”

“The finding led to an unexpected discovery: Many brain areas communicating with the amygdala in men are engaged with and responding to the external environment. For example, the visual cortex is responsible for vision, while the striatum coordinates motor actions. Conversely, many regions connected to the left-hemisphere amygdala in women control aspects of the environment within the body.”

“Recent studies have suggested possible correlations between brain structure, including differences in hemispheric ratios and connection patterns in the amygdala, and sexual orientation. Homosexual men tend to exhibit more female-like patterns in the amygdala than do heterosexual males, just as homosexual females tend to show more male-like patterns in the amygdala than do heterosexual women.”

one thing I’ve noticed is that porn has gotten considerably rougher/dirtier in the last 10 years or so. look at 90’s or earlier porn–lots of girls who flat out don’t do men, or if they do, cum dodging is rampant. and swallowing is completely unheard of.

i think this is obviously due to the internet, but is it due to men getting what they really want, or is it due to women getting what they really want, being able to view porn risk free, ie without going into some skanky adult video store in the bad part of town.

Niches fill out as opportunities expand. There’s a whole behind-the-scenes politics to this as well. Girls who won’t do cumshots won’t get as much work unless they do DP, etc. Basically, as in any field, those willing to do the dirtiest work reap the most reward.

The article discusses all these young females who love James Deen, but if you read any of their actual comments ( on Tumblr and other places), these young chicks are talking about how they like him because they “want to be dominated” and “like the aggressiveness” and wanted to be “fucked like that.” They aren’t saying they want to cuddle with him.

Also, I like how the article inflates his penis size so that he fulfills one of the “big muscles, big abs, big dicks” criteria, but that’s another issue.

“young women are still taught to be attracted to people who are older and more powerful than they are”

Taught?

Every single culture on Earth, and at every point in history, women have sought out socially influential and powerful men, and are attracted to this at least in equal measure, if not more than, physical attractiveness. Men seek youth and beauty more than anything else, a fact prostitutes and porn creators and women on the 40+ dating market can attest to. Women seek the same but seek power and social influence more. Professors hit the power and social influence buttons full-on. They command and are given authority over a woman’s peer social group. This is the key. They sit in front of the peer group, pontificating from greater authority and knowledge, and in the palaeolithic would have been the older alpha male in a group of 30-50 young people and the male the females wanted, like the male with the widest resource base and the one that commands the other males.

If you want to subvert a natural female instinct (which was designed for entirely different circumstances – we are tribal hominids by instinct, after all, with a social brain optimized for life among tiny groups in dodgy circumstances) , being a professor is pretty much perfect for subverting a palaeolithic program so basic, so hard-wired we barely think of it as a program any more. When I was in college, all the male profs were inundated with potential sexual partners; sadly, the reverse was rarely, if ever, true for female profs. The same goes for men and women with power. Female politicians again don’t acquire the opportunities male ones do, even when they seek them. The cases we do hear about are notable exceptions.

It also explains why so few men do the same: They’re programmed differently. They don’t automatically admire powerful women. They seek youth and beauty.

Sadly, this unfairness is likely one of these basal programming instincts that is then dynamically reinforced through culture. So it’s not really taught. But culture does play a reinforcing role.

The evidence for this *not* being a taught behavior (at best, a socially reinforced but likely basically instinctive program) it so overwhelming as to be almost a truism.

That being said, WTF is up with the camera work in porn? Someone needsa to tell those fuckers not to zoom in extra tight on the guy’s balls. Nobody wants to see that shit. I want to see hot babe, not sweaty nutsack.

I don’t have much to say about porn (like most straight women, I am not very interested in it). But I think you are wrong about what women find attractive.

I recently saw a documentary about the male sex worker industry in Japan (these are the male equivalent of geisha, who are paid large sums of money by female clients; none of them slept with men). The men made up to tens of thousands a month (depending on their popularity). They were pretty much all “pretty boy” types (like Leonardo di Caprio) and not too muscular (though not fat). Their clients were mostly young (20-40?), and average looking.

Because the women weren’t hideous, they could have found SOMEONE to sleep with. They chose to spend so much on the men for emotional reasons: the men were all good at listening, and more importantly, extremely good at flatttery/compliments. All the women said that the men made them feel beautiful and desired, and that is why it was worth the money.

Emotional connection and feeling desired is basically the whole reason for women to sleep with someone. Whether the sex is rough or not is of definitely secondary importance.

Half the women I’ve been with – roughly – have had pretty serious rape fantasies that they’ve explored with me. Most of the others have loved being overwhelmed in bed, a milder version of being “raped”. My current SO has said repeatedly she loves being swept away by the power of sex. This is the precise opposite of the negotiated, gentle, carefully bargained sex that feminism and “active consent” types seem to advocate. She thinks such women are both anti-sex and asexual.

My experience sample size is pretty large and culturally divergent. I’ve found it equally true in Asia and the US. Incidentally, this rape-fantasy element doesn’t include the general appeal of rougher sex: I stopped having vanilla, gentle sex with anyone a decade ago and there appears to be no complaint from any woman I’ve been with.

A large minority of women I’ve been with- about 10-15% – have been heavily into things like choking, slapping, and general severe roughness in bed. One sought me out – while married to a nice guy – to have very rough sex. She approached me directly, asking after one professional meeting. She’d been itching for a long time, apparently. I’ve spoken with other men who tell me similar stories. It would likely have shocked her husband to know how rough it was. After an afternoon session, you’d think she’d been raped, based on the occasional bruise and her condition; there were times when it became actual fighting. She decked me once and expected me to reciprocate (I did not: Warning to men: Do not actually hit her face, ever, for any reason: It’s a crazy risk).

This was not a majority – mostly, I suspect it was all about the urge to be “swept away” by a more powerful male figure – but a solid 10-15% have requested and taken very rough sex. One or two women were too extreme and I wouldn’t do what they wanted me to do (heavy hitting, extreme humiliation, etc.). I was actually called a pussy by one; but what turns on some guys doesn’t do it for others I guess.

A lot of sex-negative feminists have severe problems with this aspect of female sexuality, calling such women deviates and self-shaming low-self-esteem victims of patriarchy. I think they’re just extreme examples of basic female sexuality.

Women seek to be dominated. Some don’t. Most do. Some seek it and are turned on by it. Some abused women obviously seek out the abuse for the emotional or sexual rush it gives them – a fact obvious to all who work with them. Many are just terrified, and some hate it, but for some, the fear or the emotional chaos is a massive turn-on, like an addictive chemical. Deny this and you deny one aspect of some women’s sexuality.

I know of many women who gladly go back to abusive men not because of low self-esteem, but because they want such men to fuck them and use them: and far from low self-esteem, this seems to be one end of a continuum. This is the “Bend me over and use me” crowd, who while not a majority are a very large and significant minority. I suspect they then often fight their shame by reporting their chosen male partners from time to time, and this assuages the war going on inside their heads.

B) STUDIES:

1) Rape fantasies, their relevance, and more or less universal appeal to most women at some stage in their lives (usually when younger, and more fertile: seeking alpha sperm):

Although psychology has emphasized the study of overt behavior, the investigation of fantasy may provide unique contributions to the field. As sexual fantasies are relatively unconstrained by social consequences, they may reveal underlying psychological processes, motives, and predispositions more clearly than does overt behavior (Ellis & Symons, 1990).
…
And although fantasies about unpleasant events, such as a feared performance evaluation, are not rare, these fantasies are not pleasurable. In contrast, fantasies of forced sex are often exciting, pleasurable, and sexually arousing (Kanin, 1982).
…
As pioneering sex researcher Alfred Kinsey and colleagues (1953) forcefully argued, avoiding an area of study that is difficult to understand and perhaps uncomfortable to discuss blocks the growth of knowledge, perpetuates ignorance, and, in the long term, diminishes societal well-being. Just as important, an avoidance of this topic sends the false and disturbing message that there is something shameful about women’s sexuality.
…
Community estimates ranged from 31% to 49%, while student samples ranged from 31% to 57%. With regard to context, estimates of ever having rape fantasies with context unspecified show a range of 31% to 57%, while estimates for rape fantasies during intercourse or other sexual activities are comparable, ranging from 36% to 49%. With the possible exception of rape fantasy during masturbation, context does not appear to be a major factor. The wording of the rape fantasy item did not appear to affect results. Studies that used a variation of “overpowered or forced” showed a range of 31% to 55%, while those using the more explicit wording of “rape” ranged from 34% to 57%.
…
Overall, there are nine reports of the percentage of women who have had rape fantasies, with these estimates ranging from 31% to 57%. Estimates were evenly distributed, with a median of 42%. In addition, these may be underestimates. Claims have been made within the academic and popular cultures that rape fantasies reflect personal and societal pathology (e.g., Brownmiller, 1975). Sentiments such as these suggest that many women may be ashamed of having rape fantasies. For example, research (Gold, Balzano, & Stamey, 1991) has found that women who wrote fantasies of forced sex also rated themselves as more frightened, guilty, and disgusted after writing the fantasy than did women who did not write about forced sex.

2) Comments on this article in a piece written about it, with a nice summary:

In my personal experience, most women really appreciate subtle to moderate domination in the bedroom—a little forceful restraint, a little pain—as long as they feel safe. I had one girlfriend who wanted me to call her a slut, but that was pushing my boundaries. Though I didn’t mind calling her naughty, etc., for expressing pleasure at whatever I was doing to her. The whole “you shouldn’t like this but I know you do” routine. She explained that sexuality was taboo in her household growing up. So pretending that she was being corrupted by someone else freed her to go along with the illicit activities and indulge in her repressed desires. Not all of our play followed this narrative, but when it did, the temperature rose.
…
They combined 20 studies and a whole field of theory to evaluate eight potential explanations for women’s rape fantasies. Some of the explanations overlap with each other, and others mutually contradict. Here’s a summary:

•Masochism – The idea that women desire suffering. Women who engage in masochistic sex are more likely to have rape fantasies, but the great majority of women with rape fantasies do not want real rape. Accordingly, masochism may apply to only a small group of women.

•Sexual Blame Avoidance – (See my ex, above.) Women are socialized to not seek out sex lest they be considered tramps, but if they’re having sex against their will they can avoid guilt. Studies comparing sexual repression to rape fantasies are mixed and overall don’t support the explanation, but they may have been using wrong metrics; sexually repressed women have fewer fantasies overall but they might have a higher ratio of rape fantasies. In any case, this theory would apply to only some women.

•Openness to Sexual Experience – In some ways this is the opposite of the last one, and it doesn’t explain rape fantasies so much as it describes the type of person to has them. If you’re sexually open, you entertain a greater variety of fantasies. As one study described rape fantasy among these women, it’s “just one more expression of a generally open, positive, unrestrictive, and relatively guilt-free expression of one’s sexuality.”

•Desirabilty – Many women like to believe that they’re so attractive that men cannot resist the urge to overtake them. The evidence for this theory is suggestive but not yet conclusive. I did cover a study in Psychology Today last year indicating that women with attachment anxiety (neediness) have more sexual fantasies featuring submission.

•Male Rape Culture – Some have argued that women have been conditioned to buy into men’s fantasies of domination. But the prevalence of rape fantasies has not changed much in recent decades, even as gender roles have.

•Biological Predisposition to Surrender – In many mammalian species, the male must pursue and subdue the female in order to mate. Women may be programmed to surrender to the successful dominant male. Just like many other theories in evolutionary psychology, this one makes sense but has not been tested empirically.

•Sympathetic Activation – The sympathetic nervous system becomes engaged in times of stress or danger, activating a fight or flight response marked by increased heart rate, respiration, pupil dilation, and genital arousal. Just like on a roller coaster, fear and excitement go hand in hand.

•Adversary Transformation – In one survey of romance novels (which tend to be written by and for women), the lead female character was raped in 54%. The male heroes are usually rugged warrior types and these books may illustrate a desire to “conquer the heart of the rapist” and tame him for marriage.

•Reaction to Trauma – This one is not mentioned in the paper, but Brett Kahr, a psychoanalyst who has conducted the largest survey of sexual fantasies ever, argues that most masturbatory fantasies are attempts to transform early difficult experiences into pleasure. So those who have been sexually abused may try to master their trauma by taming those experiences.

•Laziness – Also not mentioned in the paper. The writer Tracie Egan hints at this explanation in her essay entitled “One Rape Please (To Go)” about hiring a male prostitute to play-rape her (which I recently saw her read live): “…as a girl, my equipment can be trickier to manage, therefore I need to be a boss in the bedroom to ensure I get worked the right way. [But] it gets really tiresome always being the one in charge…”

This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings. Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is somewhat higher than previous estimates. For women who have had rape fantasies, the median frequency of these fantasies was about 4 times per year, with 14% of participants reporting that they had rape fantasies at least once a week. In contrast to previous research, which suggested that rape fantasies were either entirely aversive or entirely erotic, rape fantasies were found to exist on an erotic-aversive continuum, with 9% completely aversive, 45% completely erotic, and 46% both erotic and aversive.

Great post. I could hear feminazis whimpering in agony the whole time I was reading it. Personally, I know women who have been raped (as in, they did NOT want it) and who – you guessed it – still have rape fantasies.

“Think most of the misogyny on MTV comes from men? Guess again, says a new study of the network’s shows, which finds women engage in a whopping 88 percent of the shows’ sexual dialogue, insult each other much more than the men, and offer themselves up in positive portrayals only when they’re talking about physical appearance and their ability to bounce back from getting ridiculed.”

Outcasts are always fighting to make the rest of the world seem deluded and tyrannical.

Says a guy who spends a lot of time talking about western society’s assault on (real, true!11!) masculinity?

[Heartiste: I do? Oh wait, that’s what you read after it filters through your cognitive bias.]

What I’ve said before stands; your theories are comfortable and pristine because you just ignore all those outcasts.

[I’m wondering what part of “exceptions prove the rule” don’t you understand? And if you’ve neglected to notice how often I have to say it for the benefit of trolls and stupidos like yourself.]

Straight men don’t like to see the faces of the male porn stars because it’s distracting from the action, and BONER KILLING.

You’re agreeing with Hess/Slate here, I hope you realize that.

[Hess, or the femfaggy guy who wrote the article, is arguing that straight men don’t want to see attractive male actors in porn because they might feel an attraction for them and discover a latent homosexuality bubbling forth. I’m saying that is bullshit; the real reason straight men don’t want to see too much of male porn actors other than their dicks penetrating labia and lips is because it is a turn-off. But then I could see why a distinction like that might pass you by. You might be the dumbest fuck on the internet.]

Seriously, how stupid can feminists get? I’ve only every seen this deen guy in SM movies, and everyone knows he’s not even close to being “nice”. But the real stupidity is that by showing so much knowledge about this porn star, the feminist author revealed that she watches his movies and, by the look of it, she is seriously desperate for a man to submit to. Way to deal with your internal conflicts.

Half the women I’ve been with – roughly – have had pretty serious rape fantasies that they’ve explored with me. Most of the others have loved being overwhelmed in bed, a milder version of being “raped”. My current SO has said repeatedly she loves being swept away by the power of sex. This is the precise opposite of the negotiated, gentle, carefully bargained sex that feminism and “active consent” types seem to advocate. She thinks such women are both anti-sex and asexual.

My experience sample size is pretty large and culturally divergent. I’ve found it equally true in Asia and the US. Incidentally, this rape-fantasy element doesn’t include the general appeal of rougher sex: I stopped having vanilla, gentle sex with anyone a decade ago and there appears to be no complaint from any woman I’ve been with.

A large minority of women I’ve been with- about 10-15% – have been heavily into things like choking, slapping, and general severe roughness in bed. One sought me out – while married to a nice guy – to have very rough sex. She approached me directly, asking after one professional meeting. She’d been itching for a long time, apparently. I’ve spoken with other men who tell me similar stories. It would likely have shocked her husband to know how rough it was. After an afternoon session, you’d think she’d been raped, based on the occasional bruise and her condition; there were times when it became actual fighting. She decked me once and expected me to reciprocate (I did not: Warning to men: Do not actually hit her face, ever, for any reason: It’s a crazy risk).

This was not a majority – mostly, I suspect it was all about the urge to be “swept away” by a more powerful male figure – but a solid 10-15% have requested and taken very rough sex. One or two women were too extreme and I wouldn’t do what they wanted me to do (heavy hitting, extreme humiliation, etc.). I was actually called a pussy by one; but what turns on some guys doesn’t do it for others I guess.

A lot of sex-negative feminists have severe problems with this aspect of female sexuality, calling such women deviates and self-shaming low-self-esteem victims of patriarchy. I think they’re just extreme examples of basic female sexuality.

Women seek to be dominated. Some don’t. Most do. Some seek it and are turned on by it. Some abused women obviously seek out the abuse for the emotional or sexual rush it gives them – a fact obvious to all who work with them. Many are just terrified, and some hate it, but for some, the fear or the emotional chaos is a massive turn-on, like an addictive chemical. Deny this and you deny one aspect of some women’s sexuality.

I know of many women who gladly go back to abusive men not because of low self-esteem, but because they want such men to fuck them and use them: and far from low self-esteem, this seems to be one end of a continuum. This is the “Bend me over and use me” crowd, who while not a majority are a very large and significant minority. I suspect they then often fight their shame by reporting their chosen male partners from time to time, and this assuages the war going on inside their heads.

B) STUDIES:

1) Rape fantasies, their relevance, and more or less universal appeal to most women at some stage in their lives (usually when younger, and more fertile: seeking alpha sperm):

“http findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2372/is_1_45/ai_n24383385/”

Although psychology has emphasized the study of overt behavior, the investigation of fantasy may provide unique contributions to the field. As sexual fantasies are relatively unconstrained by social consequences, they may reveal underlying psychological processes, motives, and predispositions more clearly than does overt behavior (Ellis & Symons, 1990).
…
And although fantasies about unpleasant events, such as a feared performance evaluation, are not rare, these fantasies are not pleasurable. In contrast, fantasies of forced sex are often exciting, pleasurable, and sexually arousing (Kanin, 1982).
…
As pioneering sex researcher Alfred Kinsey and colleagues (1953) forcefully argued, avoiding an area of study that is difficult to understand and perhaps uncomfortable to discuss blocks the growth of knowledge, perpetuates ignorance, and, in the long term, diminishes societal well-being. Just as important, an avoidance of this topic sends the false and disturbing message that there is something shameful about women’s sexuality.
…
Community estimates ranged from 31% to 49%, while student samples ranged from 31% to 57%. With regard to context, estimates of ever having rape fantasies with context unspecified show a range of 31% to 57%, while estimates for rape fantasies during intercourse or other sexual activities are comparable, ranging from 36% to 49%. With the possible exception of rape fantasy during masturbation, context does not appear to be a major factor. The wording of the rape fantasy item did not appear to affect results. Studies that used a variation of “overpowered or forced” showed a range of 31% to 55%, while those using the more explicit wording of “rape” ranged from 34% to 57%.
…
Overall, there are nine reports of the percentage of women who have had rape fantasies, with these estimates ranging from 31% to 57%. Estimates were evenly distributed, with a median of 42%. In addition, these may be underestimates. Claims have been made within the academic and popular cultures that rape fantasies reflect personal and societal pathology (e.g., Brownmiller, 1975). Sentiments such as these suggest that many women may be ashamed of having rape fantasies. For example, research (Gold, Balzano, & Stamey, 1991) has found that women who wrote fantasies of forced sex also rated themselves as more frightened, guilty, and disgusted after writing the fantasy than did women who did not write about forced sex.

2) Comments on this article in a piece written about it, with a nice summary:

In my personal experience, most women really appreciate subtle to moderate domination in the bedroom—a little forceful restraint, a little pain—as long as they feel safe. I had one girlfriend who wanted me to call her a slut, but that was pushing my boundaries. Though I didn’t mind calling her naughty, etc., for expressing pleasure at whatever I was doing to her. The whole “you shouldn’t like this but I know you do” routine. She explained that sexuality was taboo in her household growing up. So pretending that she was being corrupted by someone else freed her to go along with the illicit activities and indulge in her repressed desires. Not all of our play followed this narrative, but when it did, the temperature rose.
…
They combined 20 studies and a whole field of theory to evaluate eight potential explanations for women’s rape fantasies. Some of the explanations overlap with each other, and others mutually contradict. Here’s a summary:

•Masochism – The idea that women desire suffering. Women who engage in masochistic sex are more likely to have rape fantasies, but the great majority of women with rape fantasies do not want real rape. Accordingly, masochism may apply to only a small group of women.

•Sexual Blame Avoidance – (See my ex, above.) Women are socialized to not seek out sex lest they be considered tramps, but if they’re having sex against their will they can avoid guilt. Studies comparing sexual repression to rape fantasies are mixed and overall don’t support the explanation, but they may have been using wrong metrics; sexually repressed women have fewer fantasies overall but they might have a higher ratio of rape fantasies. In any case, this theory would apply to only some women.

•Openness to Sexual Experience – In some ways this is the opposite of the last one, and it doesn’t explain rape fantasies so much as it describes the type of person to has them. If you’re sexually open, you entertain a greater variety of fantasies. As one study described rape fantasy among these women, it’s “just one more expression of a generally open, positive, unrestrictive, and relatively guilt-free expression of one’s sexuality.”

•Desirabilty – Many women like to believe that they’re so attractive that men cannot resist the urge to overtake them. The evidence for this theory is suggestive but not yet conclusive. I did cover a study in Psychology Today last year indicating that women with attachment anxiety (neediness) have more sexual fantasies featuring submission.

•Male Rape Culture – Some have argued that women have been conditioned to buy into men’s fantasies of domination. But the prevalence of rape fantasies has not changed much in recent decades, even as gender roles have.

•Biological Predisposition to Surrender – In many mammalian species, the male must pursue and subdue the female in order to mate. Women may be programmed to surrender to the successful dominant male. Just like many other theories in evolutionary psychology, this one makes sense but has not been tested empirically.

•Sympathetic Activation – The sympathetic nervous system becomes engaged in times of stress or danger, activating a fight or flight response marked by increased heart rate, respiration, pupil dilation, and genital arousal. Just like on a roller coaster, fear and excitement go hand in hand.

•Adversary Transformation – In one survey of romance novels (which tend to be written by and for women), the lead female character was raped in 54%. The male heroes are usually rugged warrior types and these books may illustrate a desire to “conquer the heart of the rapist” and tame him for marriage.

•Reaction to Trauma – This one is not mentioned in the paper, but Brett Kahr, a psychoanalyst who has conducted the largest survey of sexual fantasies ever, argues that most masturbatory fantasies are attempts to transform early difficult experiences into pleasure. So those who have been sexually abused may try to master their trauma by taming those experiences.

•Laziness – Also not mentioned in the paper. The writer Tracie Egan hints at this explanation in her essay entitled “One Rape Please (To Go)” about hiring a male prostitute to play-rape her (which I recently saw her read live): “…as a girl, my equipment can be trickier to manage, therefore I need to be a boss in the bedroom to ensure I get worked the right way. [But] it gets really tiresome always being the one in charge…”

This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings. Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is somewhat higher than previous estimates. For women who have had rape fantasies, the median frequency of these fantasies was about 4 times per year, with 14% of participants reporting that they had rape fantasies at least once a week. In contrast to previous research, which suggested that rape fantasies were either entirely aversive or entirely erotic, rape fantasies were found to exist on an erotic-aversive continuum, with 9% completely aversive, 45% completely erotic, and 46% both erotic and aversive.

After an afternoon session, you’d think she’d been raped, based on the occasional bruise and her condition;

In his early 20s freakzilluh used to score regularly with slightly underage girls. One of them, an extremely precocious nymphette who really did all the courting, after a bout caught sight of herself in a mirror and said: “I look like I got mauled by a bear.”

Then she giggled. And I corrected her grammar (“Was mauled.”)

Those were the days.

Studies that used a variation of “overpowered or forced” showed a range of 31% to 55%, while those using the more explicit wording of “rape” ranged from 34% to 57%. […] In addition, these may be underestimates.

Holy shit. No President since Eisenhower had a 57% majority!

When you review all your lays, how many wanted you to “push me against the wall and fuck me really hard”?

I did cover a study in Psychology Today last year indicating that women with attachment anxiety (neediness) have more sexual fantasies featuring submission.

This must be true. I once had a damaged fatty cry & rock herself to sleep while actually clinging to me when she was informed there would be no repeat performance in future.

*Note well: Of that impressive “whole field of theory”, most of it feminist squid ink, the one real contender, Biological Predisposition to Surrender, receives, with Masochism, shortest shrift. I wonder why lozlzozozoz.

Gorbachev, excellent post. Very true, very interesting links and your personal experience resonates with my own (sans “you’re a pussy!” and a girl throwing a punch). Definitely consider writing a blog.

I remember a while back there was a study that showed all of human DNA is derived from about 40% of the males that ever lived, and about 80% of the females that ever lived. Its been mentioned in several posts.

Having trouble finding it, and wondering if you could you link me that study? Or if anyone else could remember it and post it.

I dont buy it for a minute. Rocco Sifreddi was a very popular male porn star in the 90s and he was a very good looking, well built, hung like a horse dude, known to be very aggressive and downright nasty with the ladies. And the only communication he ever gave to the women was his admiration for their button holes. Hell, he would often talk to the director (John Stagliano) while giving colon lessons as if the chick wasnt even in the room. Often to hilarious effect.

Most women DO fantasize about rape because the most read women novels ALL have scenes in which the woman is taken by force by a strong man.

Arlequin novels used to be the most sold books on the planet – not the most sold romance novel but the most sold books in any category on the planet – and EACH and EVERY one of those hundreds of thousands of Arlequin romance novels that are read by hundreds of millions of women have at least one scene wich is borderline rape.

Hundreds of millions of men eat pizza, would anyone argue men do not really like pizza?

well most women fantasize about rape, the books they buy and read say it all.

I always laugh when I hear so-called feminists extol the virtues of pornography as if it has no ill effects on either men or women. The fact of the matter is that there is an ever expanding body of research that is finding that porn addiction – which affects men much, much more than women – is extremely damaging not only to the individual but especially to their spouse. And I’m sure it’s it’s the case just as much if it uses caring, emotionally available male porn stars or crude, testosterone-abundant gang bangers.

I guess you can’t stand the competition. I’ve been watching porn most of my life. The addiction aspect may be true for some people, but most handle it fine. I watch the same porn I always have liked. I haven’t moved on to ever harder stuff and I have no rouble relating o real women either. I’m also 50. I’m happily married and have a far above average sex life. Porn is at most an occassional diversion and amusement for me. That’s because my wife can make me feel like a man still.

The real reason women hate porn is because it raises mens’ expectations for sex to above starvation level and undermines womens’ ability to exploit them for resources without sex. Essentially the same reason prostitution is illegal.

The other real reason women don’t like porn: it shows men that there are thousands of young attractive women who will do filthy, kinky things with complete strangers, for a measly $800….while their fat disgusting wives that they have given half their fortunes to act like they are giving a gift from heaven to blow him twice a year.

When I was in my mid-teens some uber-pretentious male feminist leftist deconstructivist sort (somewhere about 5 years my senior) condescended to me that I must be gay because I didn’t like viewing men in hetero porn. Of course, being less sharp and a lot more naive and insecure at the time, I threw a strop in a “you can’t say that!” sort of way. He took much glee in making me squirm.

Now the tables have turned and I love making liberal-leftists throw a fit.

Ron Jeremy also looks like the guy in the porno movie “who doesn’t belong there.” At least when The Hedgehog shows up you know you’ll get a few laughs and also get to laugh at how such a repulsive fella can get laid, a free sandwich and $200 all in a day’s work.

this is interesting article, but i actually think that the article comments are even more interesting! I was a bit suspicious of the article itself, read in other places that it (the Slate article) was written by a gay man.

Oh.my.God.
I won’t be able to look at Amy Adams the same way. Well, at least because of the character she played in a movie seems….a little familiar from Gorby’s description (not that Gorby banged this particular chick, the scenario is similar).
Julia Powell experimented with sadomasochistic sex.http://www.salon.com/2009/12/08/julie_powell_cleaving/

” but in terms of that real craving, where was that coming from? I think it was really tied to some other kind of deep, really deep psychological issues that I was having at the time and need for this self-punishment.”
“The BDSM stuff that I was doing, and was really very attracted to, had to do with the taking and the giving up of power and that balance that happens. In these rough sex encounters I was playing the part of the submissive, but I got power out of that because I was making these guys think they were powerful, and that was a sort of power in itself”

[…] in a piece pointing out that feminists have a flawed understanding of what turns men and women on, Heartiste linked a 2009 article in the NY Times Magazine about female sexuality. The article, which runs to […]